G'day and welcome to the Australian Aviation Thread Part 130, in the previous thread the following was discussed / announced:

Australian Aviation Thread Part 129

- Vietnam Airlines
- Australian Border Force strike, impact on international airports
- Qantas raises concerns about Tigerair's request to operate to Denpasar/Bali
- Jetstar to operate additional 787 services across the Tasman over the New Year
- Fantastic summary of all new routes, upgraded services and upguages for NW period
- International services from Perth
- John Borghetti pay increase
- Qantas special liveries
- Qantas new A330 Business Class progress update
- Qantas international services at Brisbane versus Melbourne
- Cathay Pacific to add a 5x weekly flight to Adelaide from December 2015
- Qatar and Australia expand air services agreement from 14 p/week to 21 p/week
- Malindo Air increases Perth services to 10x weekly before flights even commence
- SQ increase Sydney to 5x daily between June and September 2016
- Rumours of a new AirAsia X flight from Gold Coast to Auckland
- Future possible new airlines to Australia
- Jetstar operates its last A330 services from Honolulu to Brisbane, now al 787 fleet
- JetGo commences its new Gold Coast - Rockhampton - Townsville ERJ-135 flights
- Tanker Air Carrier DC-10 N612AX arrives in Australia
- Extra flights for the NRL and AFL Grand Finals
- China Eastern's planned BNE-PVG services due to commence January 2016
- AA to codeshare on Qantas' Vancouver services
- Jetstar operates its inaugural service from Wuhan to the Gold Coast
- Qantas set to reward its investors
- Qatar Airways confirms daily Sydney services, due to start March 2016 (777-300ERs)
- Malindo Air receives CASA approval to start Perth services
- LAN to codeshare on a number of domestic Australia and NZ Jetstar services
- Virgin Australia delays rollout of new Business Class on 77Ws due to certification delays
- Cathay Pacific commences additional daily 77W service to Sydney
- Qantas 747 VH-OEB operates SYD/MEL due AFL Grand Final traffic
- Jetstar's BNE-MEL 787-8 services to end?
- Virgin Australia A330 AFL Grand Final flyover
- Virgin Australia criticised on social media over the aircraft's flight track
- Qantas international services
- Qantas freight runs between Brisbane and Sydney
- Virgin Australia to open new Perth terminal in November 2015
- Virgin Australia to open a new Townsville lounge in 2016
- Qantas revises its Brisbane - Tokyo schedule with an earlier departure time
- Qantas to operate additional Singapore services over Christmas and the New Year
- Rex announces it will terminate its Newcastle - Ballina flights
- Malindo Air's new Perth services finally go on sale
- AFL Grand Final fares
- Qantas 767F freight services
- Qantas to operate nonstop flights from Perth to London?

Here's to another great thread  

Quoting QF175 (Thread starter): - Qantas to operate nonstop flights from Perth to London?

Continuing from the previous thread, I think its AJ spruiking the possibilities of the range of the 787-9 rather than PER-LHR being firmly on QF's radar.
From having 0 international services a year ago (and now only having a daily PER-SIN service), it would be a surprise if PER would suddenly get a ULH route to LHR. A certain JV partner would certainly be less than impressed if this went ahead as well.

If this were a few years ago where the mining sector was still going strong, you would argue BHP/Rio alone could probably fill 80% of the premium cabin between their London offices and their Perth offices, but in today's environment, not likely.

I wonder how this new PER-LHR flight fits into the EK-QF partnership? Must be provisions to allow it if he is already spruiking that it will happen.

With MEL-DFW and PER-LHR they are certainly signaling their intent to think outside the box, which will hopefully see some more bold route decisions in coming years.

Ultimately, if the optimum path could be flown with a twin, MEL-SCL would likely seem to be a route with decent potential. The size of the 789 is a better fit and it is one of the biggest gaps in the route network from MEL currently. LA has also stated its goal of a 2nd Australian destination down the track too so we will see.

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 2): With MEL-DFW and PER-LHR they are certainly signaling their intent to think outside the box, which will hopefully see some more bold route decisions in coming years.

I'm not holding my breath. It's all just part of a very cleverly put together media strategy (which has been in place for 3-4 years) to now appear positive, strong and innovative following the turnaround.

FY18 will roll around and we will see SFO and JFK (either from SYD or BNE), then FY19 will see SCL and something else across the Pacific and then, oh, whoops, we've run out of 787s. That's a shame.

I'd love to be proven wrong, but there is no evidence at this stage to suggest that any of the new routes QF are spruiking has any chance at all of being started.

I would usually think that way, but as a whole most of the things that QF have been doing of late seem far deeper than just PR.

There move into re-starting services to some destinations (both domestic and international), new products and a more confident vibe about the airline seem to be adding up to some positive steps being taken away from just the usual media spin.

Who knows though, as a couple of years can see the operating environment change which may change their strategy, but so far I wouldn't be so pessimistic about their comments.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 3): I'd love to be proven wrong, but there is no evidence at this stage to suggest that any of the new routes QF are spruiking has any chance at all of being started.

If traffic between US and Australia continues to grow, and if the 787-9 indeed has the range, I'd say MEL-DFW is definitely a possibility in a few years.

MEL doesn't even have an SFO connection, its only path to continental US is through LAX, and that's an airport many connecting passengers will go out of their way to avoid. Also AA's network at DFW is vastly superior to its LAX network.

I fly MEL-MSY a couple of times a year for example, and QF hasn't been a strong proposition for me because AA doesn't fly LAX-MSY direct whereas UA and DL do (UA flies 1x daily and DL 3x daily). However AA has over 9 daily flights between DFW-MSY, so if I was flying to DFW, QF/AA would suddenly look like a very enticing option.

The same is true about many destinations in the US. There is a reason DFW is called AA's fortress hub. If the 789 has the range, MEL-DFW makes a lot of sense to me.

Philippine Airlines is continuing to evaluate a return to Perth per yesterday's Australian. Perhaps nonstop down the track with A321neos?

Quoting qf002 (Reply 3): I'd love to be proven wrong, but there is no evidence at this stage to suggest that any of the new routes QF are spruiking has any chance at all of being started.

I posted in the other thread but I think in the next 20 years you will see QF on PER-LHR and SYD-JFK. They will be the new standard for long haul flights. Now whether the 787 is the right aircraft is debateable. Personally I think there are plenty of other things to do first.

^^ I tend to agree that there are likely better options out there than PER-LHR, but I think it at least shows the intent for QF to be innovative.

It will be interesting to see what QF will actually do with the first 8 789's on order though.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 7): K. They will be the new standard for long haul flights. Now whether the 787 is the right aircraft is debateable. Personally I think there are plenty of other things to do first.

Perth to London non-stop would have been great in a world full of cashed-up miners (as would PER-LAX) but after the resources collapse it just looks stupid.

It entails carrying huge volumes of fuel to carry the extra fuel.

As for SYD-JFK, the problem is the extra yields required to make it viable. That means that the daily volumes willing to pay the 25% fare premium over SYD-LAX-JFK make it a daily A318 sized market comparable to LCY-JFK. The failure of SIN-EWR speaks volumes.

If the 788 could operate at the same cost levels as a 789 it would be a much better option. The 789 is going to have much too much capacity, and the airline would end up discounting and failing.

Regional Express (Rex) looks set to expand into Western Australia, the airline recently posted a couple of Perth-based roles on their careers page:

B1 and B2 LAMEs
Airport Coordinator

Virgin Australia Regional Airlines (VARA) decided not to re-tender for the regulated routes from Perth to Albany, Esperance and Ravensthorpe and will discontinue services to those ports in February 2016 (along with Derby, which is operated by F100 unlike the other routes operated by F50s). Rex was said to be very keen to tender for the Albany, Esperance and Ravensthorpe runs using their smaller Saab 340 aircraft as was Skippers Aviation (Dash 8).

Unless Rex has suddenly decided to open a charter base in Perth (unlikely) it therefore appears that the airline may have been successful in tendering for the abovementioned routes or some of the others that were up for tender such as Laverton, Leonora etc.

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 10): Perth to London non-stop would have been great in a world full of cashed-up miners (as would PER-LAX) but after the resources collapse it just looks stupid.

From an economics perspective there is more to Western Australia than mining.

Out of all of the states it is the largest exporter of agricultural products, manufactured goods and of course mineral and petroleum commodities.

Geographically, it is well positioned for growth in the SE Asian markets.

Western Australia is probably a market in its own right. These latest developments are telling us the airlines are finally starting to see WA a valuable market.

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 4): I would usually think that way, but as a whole most of the things that QF have been doing of late seem far deeper than just PR.

New routes like SYD-SFO (which was never unprofitable in the first place) or BNE-NRT are in a completely different ballpark to PER-LHR.

Quoting aryonoco (Reply 5): If traffic between US and Australia continues to grow, and if the 787-9 indeed has the range, I'd say MEL-DFW is definitely a possibility in a few years.

As a market, I agree entirely. It's the economics that I have trouble with.

MEL-DFW is not much shorter than SIN-EWR (only ~400nm), which was flown with a more capable aircraft and in a lower density configuration. It also didn't have to contend with the sort of winds that DFW-MEL would face.

Maybe with a stop on the way back? I'd also like to see MEL-SFO to replace the extra 2wk MEL-LAX and any capacity lost when QF drops from the 744 to 789s on SYD-SFO.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 7): I posted in the other thread but I think in the next 20 years you will see QF on PER-LHR and SYD-JFK.

20 years I can get onboard with, but the idea that QF is launching PER-LHR with a ~250 seat 789 in 2017 is nothing short of ludicrous.

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 10): As for SYD-JFK, the problem is the extra yields required to make it viable. That means that the daily volumes willing to pay the 25% fare premium over SYD-LAX-JFK make it a daily A318 sized market comparable to LCY-JFK. The failure of SIN-EWR speaks volumes.

It will depend largely on how Sydney's economy develops over the next decade. If our presence as a finance hub increases or we suddenly become Malcolm Turnbull's hub for global innovation then I think it's a feasible idea with a premium-heavy aircraft (ie a 60J/40W/120Y A359 or 789).

If UA and AC continue to grow (or DL/VA/NZ decide to become more agressive) then it becomes a matter of maintaining current yields and competitiveness as much as anything else. It's also worth remembering that QF has already shown that it can attract a substantial fare premium for cutting out stops -- they did so with DFW (not sure if that surcharge is still around?).

Quoting zkncj (Reply 8): Wouldn't it be funny if this NZvQF little war ended up with NZ extending there AKL-PER this onto LHR, before Qantas even had an chance to start the route?

I think it's extremely unlikely. CEO Luxon has said, more than once, that besides AKL-LAX-LHR there won't be any more long distance one-stops.

I guess it's possible that Qantas treating NZ like the seventh Australian state might change his mind, but I think there are subtler responses - United's SFO-AKL, for example, which makes me smile.

And even though I don't put a literal interpretation on Pacific Rim, even I would be hard pressed to include PER-LHR within that concept.

mariner

Quoting zkncj (Reply 8):

Quoting qf002 (Reply 13): MEL-DFW is not much shorter than SIN-EWR (only ~400nm), which was flown with a more capable aircraft and in a lower density configuration.

Well the 789 is also going to use a hell of a lot less fuel than a A345, and is also a smaller plane so should be easier to fill. But then again, Melbourne and Dallas aren't exactly Singapore and NYC either, so it's really comparing apples and oranges.

I agree that MEL-DFW might just be outside the 789's envelop to be done with a decent load and hence profitably. Maybe in a few years when the aircraft has had a few PIPs. Or maybe with a stop at BNE on the way back like it was done with the 744s from SYD.

Or, if QF is seriously thinking about these ULH routes in future, they might be seriously looking at the 777X in a few years. The 778 should be able to do such routes or PER-LHR easily. I mean, the A380s have to be replaced at some point in 2020s, right?

Quoting qf002 (Reply 13): From an economics perspective there is more to Western Australia than mining. Out of all of the states it is the largest exporter of agricultural products, manufactured goods and of course mineral and petroleum commodities. Geographically, it is well positioned for growth in the SE Asian markets

Absolutely. There's also the demographic side of things to consider. Perth has as many British born residents as Sydney, despite only having about a third of the total population. Something like 66% of Western Australians have a British parent. With intelligent cooperation between QF and the WA state government, there's no reason this couldn't be made to work. Both parties have shown a willingness to advertise internationally before. A large number of pax to make the service viable could come from Brits "starting their Australian adventure" in the west.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 8): Wouldn't it be funny if this NZvQF little war ended up with NZ extending there AKL-PER this onto LHR, before Qantas even had an chance to start the route? With an additional 3x 789 joing the fleet in 2016 they got to use them somewhere.

Actually it would be even funnier if NZ started PER-LHR when QF never really had any firm intention to do so. I think NZ have better routes to stick their 787-9's than on PER-LHR and it has better things to do than to try and engage in spoiling tactics against QF.

Quoting qf744fan (Reply 16): With intelligent cooperation between QF and the WA state government, there's no reason this couldn't be made to work. Both parties have shown a willingness to advertise internationally before. A large number of pax to make the service viable could come from Brits "starting their Australian adventure" in the west.

It'll take a bit more than just advertising to make the route work. It is a ULH route, you need the premium cabin to be filled consistently for the route to work.

QF10 - LHR-DXB-MEL A380 Diverted to Adelaide tonight
EK407 - AKL-MEL A380 Diverted to Adelaide tonight

Currently a thunderstorm, other planes are in a holding pattern and seem to be getting in slowly. The weather cannot decide whether arrive on 27 or 34!

QF 10 now on its way to MEL from ADL

I have always thought that PER-LHR would be on QF's radar with the emergence of more efficient ultra long range twins, along with SYD-JFK, so this talk does not surprise me.

When QF firmed the 789 order I thought the odds of the above happening slightly went up.

I wouldn't be surprised if the route went ahead in 2017 or the talk just gets dismissed - for now.

Having said that, I do believe we will see an Australia-Europe non-stop route within ten years, possibly even before 2020, and I do believe it will be PER-LHR.

With more and more 787s and A350s coming into service, if QF don't do it, another carrier might, including BA in the future.

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 1): From having 0 international services a year ago (and now only having a daily PER-SIN service), it would be a surprise if PER would suddenly get a ULH route to LHR.

I don't think the route is as much about PER as it is about having a non-stop between Australia and Europe and the so called 'prestige' bragging rights the operator of such a route would loudly exercise  

PER just happens to pretty much be the only main Australian airport that might be within range to dispatch and receive a non-stop flight to LHR because it's not going to happen at DRW.

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 17): Actually it would be even funnier if NZ started PER-LHR when QF never really had any firm intention to do so. I think NZ have better routes to stick their 787-9's than on PER-LHR and it has better things to do than to try and engage in spoiling tactics against QF.

Is PER or HKG more profitable / successful for NZ?

If it's the later, I can't see NZ doing AKL-PER-LHR when they dropped AKL-HKG-LHR which makes more sense IMHO.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 20): PER just happens to pretty much be the only main Australian airport that might be within range to dispatch and receive a non-stop flight to LHR because it's not going to happen at DRW.

Why not DRW? Other than a poor connection point for PER orginating PAX, it offers the shortest distance for a direct LHR-Australia leg and has the benefit of been on the GC path between SYD and London. DRW to MEL, SYD and BNE is a shorter distance than PER.

I've made a table comparing a range of different connection options from LHR to SYD


Via Dubai 9473 nm
EGLL-OMDB 2972 nm
OMDB-YSSY 6500 nm

Via Singapore 9274 nm
EGLL-WSSS 5878 nm
WSSS-YSSY 3396 nm

Via Perth 9602 nm
EGLL-YPPH 7829 nm
YPPH-YSSY 1773 nm

Via Darwin 9191 nm
EGLL-YPDN 7490 nm
YPDN-YSSY 1701 nm

Direct
EGLL-YSSY 9188 nm
EGLL-YMML 9127 nm

Via Hong Kong 9189 nm
EGLL-VHHH 5209 nm
VHHH-YSSY 3980 nm



This shows Hong Kong as the most direct stopover point with Darwin the most direct in Australia. Both practically sit along the GC path. Both would be affected by poor airspace management in China in reality. Give me the choice to break up my journey in DRW or HGK i'll choose HGK.

Perth is the most indirect stopover point, I would choose all the others over Perth. DRW is shorter than both SIN and DXB.

I think this shows direct LHR-Australia flights are completely unfeasible. I will eat my left foot if QF introduces these, and I think it was a foolish and pointless thing for Joyce to make a statement on.

Quoting a320fan (Reply 21): I think this shows direct LHR-Australia flights are completely unfeasible. I will eat my left foot if QF introduces these, and I think it was a foolish and pointless thing for Joyce to make a statement on.

Without seeing the text of Joyce's speech (they are sometimes published at qantasnewsroom.com.au, but not this one) perhaps it should have some fine print attached*. * For illustrative purposes only.

Or it's a cunning plan to trick a competitor to rush in first and lose a lot of money. I mean, hey the Qantas Group are poking around in NZ right now and who's got 789s right now? You know you want to...  

I would have suggested the pretender over at VA but they don't have the right aircraft to do it.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 20): called 'prestige' bragging rights the operator of such a route would loudly exercise

I can guarantee you that QF, at least while under current management, will not be opening any routes that do not provide the best RIO.

AJ and his crew are not infallible, they have made mistakes before (Jetstar Hong Kong for example) and I'm sure they will make more in the future, but I'm confident that opening "prestige" routes will not be one of them. Thankfully, that era of aviation is now gone for good.

Quoting aryonoco (Reply 23): I can guarantee you that QF, at least while under current management, will not be opening any routes that do not provide the best RIO. AJ and his crew are not infallible, they have made mistakes before (Jetstar Hong Kong for example) and I'm sure they will make more in the future, but I'm confident that opening "prestige" routes will not be one of them. Thankfully, that era of aviation is now gone for good.

I agree. While I think it's great for AJ to be talking about I don't see the 787 being an aircraft which is capable, with a commercial payload of doing PER-LHR or SYD-JFK as a non-stop. I think it will be the next generation that will be capable of it which will be based off of everything which Boeing and Airbus have learned from the 787 & A350 programs. But for now Australia to London non-stop will remain an unattainable goal.

Quoting a320fan (Reply 21):

Haha I'm so glad somebody else went there!! DRW is precisely what I was thinking, rather than PER...

BME is even closer, and just imagine how well a new BME-LHR service would tie in with the new triple daily A380 service that EK apparently has planned for 2017!

 

DRW is a possibility but it seems to me that if you are going to fly via DRW, you may as just as well go back to using SIN as a hub. Distances are about the same and SIN has the advantage of also being a hub into Asia (providing you have a suitable partner to operate the flights)....RedQ anyone?

Aust - LHR will only really make sense when it can be economically flown from MEL and SYD. As it currently stands, there is no aircraft currently capable of doing this. The A359LR is not defined enough to be definitive but SYD-LHR is probably even beyond it meaning there is no aircraft flying or known to be in concept that is capable of doing this.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 26): BME is even closer, and just imagine how well a new BME-LHR service would tie in with the new triple daily A380 service that EK apparently has planned for 2017!

  

I don;t know about the Emirates part, but BME as a fully functioning international airport is an old dream of mine.  

mariner

Quoting qf002 (Reply 26): BME is even closer, and just imagine how well a new BME-LHR service would tie in with the new triple daily A380 service that EK apparently has planned for 2017!

If we are gonna go down this path might as well move down the coast a little and go from Port Headland or Karratha. Both (plus BME) to London are shorter than DFW-SYD. From Karratha it's only 7377nm to LHR! :P


Just imagine.

SYD-KTA-LHR A388
MEL-KTA-LHR A388
BNE-KTA-FRA 789
PER-KTA-CDG 789
ADL-KTA 738
DRW-KTA 738
ASP-KTA 738
CNS-KTA 738
CBR-KTA 738
AKL-KTA-IST A332

[Edited 2015-10-11 20:29:11]

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 27): DRW is a possibility but it seems to me that if you are going to fly via DRW, you may as just as well go back to using SIN as a hub. Distances are about the same and SIN has the advantage of also being a hub into Asia (providing you have a suitable partner to operate the flights)....RedQ anyone?

Ultimately it is about market size and yields.... not the shortest distance.

an additional 400nm flying on a 9000nm sector is nothing.

it's the difference between a 1.5 or 2.5 hour stopover.

I suspect the PER discussions are to put pressure on airport pricing in places like SIN, DXB or anywhere in between.

Quoting a320fan (Reply 29): If we are gonna go down this path might as well move down the coast a little and go from Port Headland or Karratha.

Why stop there?! If the purpose is to have a direct flight from "Australia" to London, I think Cocos Island would be the perfect place! CCK-LHR is merely 6244 nm, an A332 is all that is required to make this flight!

All this talk about PER or DRW or even BME is ignoring the main reason for the EK alliance. My last 6 trips to Europe have not included LHR. People in the last century would start their trip in London, no so much anymore. The flight I would expect could be something like PER-DXB-BER

Quoting Airvan00 (Reply 32): People in the last century would start their trip in London, no so much anymore. The flight I would expect could be something like PER-DXB-BER

But many people still do! Not as many as before I'll grant you but still enough IMHO to fill a B789 a day. While I do think PER-DXB is likely, a SYD-PER-LHR same plane service would be for O&D from SYD & PER, maybe connections from other eastern points but the split terminal design at PER would be an impediment.

We shall see what we shall see.

Gemuser

Quoting gemuser (Reply 33): a SYD-PER-LHR same plane service would be for O&D from SYD & PER, maybe connections from other eastern points

Exactly, or not necessarily even same plane, you could in theory use existing flights to get people from MEL & SYD (certainly if the QF domestic terminal moves). I just think that extra (or replacement    ) capacity to Europe for 2 airframes per daily flight as opposed to the current 3 is going to catch the accountants eyes.

With QR starting ADL, does this mean CNS could be under consideration as these were both added during their last refresh of the map of where they serve?

ADL I had known about but haven't heard anything about CNS but doesn't mean they won't try it.

Nothing surprises me about QR or this industry as a whole these days.

Quoting zkokq (Reply 35): With QR starting ADL, does this mean CNS could be under consideration as these were both added during their last refresh of the map of where they serve?

Well spotted... if they had Brisbane on that map as well I wouldn't have thought anything in to it, but given they don't...

I really cannot imagine CNS being able to support QR - they currently have 4x weekly to HKG but this is operated BNE-CNS-HKG and has a sizeable BNE originating passengers. They also recently have Silkair but I heard that has been cut back to 2x weekly on the 737 via DRW on some legs... how is QR going to serve this market? Run a tag from DPS? That seems the only viable (though unlikely) option.

Qatar Airways serves Cairns via a CX codeshare (same with Adelaide, but with today's announcement this may change). Bizarrely QR doesn't have any sort of codeshare agreement with CX to Brisbane, hence why it is not shown on the route map per above.

Today's announcement feom QR about flights to Adelaide is a massive win for the city and state economy as well as for passengers. The A350 J class product is far superior to that of the 77W and the same can be said about Economy.

Remember that Sir Richard Branson stated a desire to fly Virgin Atlantic Dreamliner 9s non-stop LHR-Perth when he announced their order years ago ... flashy yes he is, but an astute businessman undoubtedly as well. Maybe Alan Joyce is taking a leaf from his book and floating an idea that is technically possible and has attracted lots of arguably positive attention, but ultimately will not happen?!?!

As for Qatar's new Adelaide service, could a Canberra tag on be added, hmmmm? Or a Christchurch one? Or will Qatar's Adelaide initiative see one of the other ME3 launch Canberra to gain a 'first mover' advantage there in response? Arguably the ME3 need to continue growing to succeed with their massive fleet development plans and Australia doesn't have many 'regional' centres open for an increased Aussie footprint outside the limits of existing traffic rights.

And just how soon will Qantas announce it's first 'top up' incremental order for extra Dreamliners? My guess is that there will be regularly spaced small orders as happened with the 737-800...

Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 37): BNE-CNS-HKG and has a sizeable BNE originating passengers. They also recently have Silkair but I heard that has been cut back to 2x weekly on the 737 via DRW on some legs... how is QR going to serve this market? Run a tag from DPS? That seems the only viable (though unlikely) option.

JQ well and truly have the CNS-DPS market covered, but whether the market can sustain a second carrier is another matter, but QR would have the feed from their DOH hub. Not to mention Hong Kong Airlines have recently announced CNS via OOL - yet another international airline there. Yes, CNS is quite a sizeable tourist destination in its own right, but also a very popular one for Papua New Guineans - still knowing quite a number of locals in Port Moresby, Australia (in particular Cairns and Brisbane) are 2 of the most visited international destinations for them, Cairns due to the climate being so close to what is found there, so it's almost like a home away from home for them.

A suggestion, what about DOH-OOL for QR with paid shuttle buses for those intending to head to BNE?

OOL is outside of the current bilateral for 21 flights covering SYD/MEL/PER/BNE, as we know is all taken up with dailies to MEL/PER and now SYD.

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 39): As for Qatar's new Adelaide service, could a Canberra tag on be added, hmmmm?

Wouldn't be worth it when they can use the existing QF service. CHC maybe, but I don't see CBR (unfortunately... I'd move heaven & earth to see CBR's first A350 land :P )

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 37):

I agree. I personally think they're probably done with Oz for now, and I would've thought the operators of DRW would fight pretty hard against CNS if they thought there was more to come. In terms of MI, though, I believe there has been a minor cut to frequency (probably seasonal as the North isn't a tourist's dream this time of year) but CNS has always been served via DRW since it started - SIN-DRW-CNS-SIN some days, SIN-CNS-DRW-SIN others.

DOH-OOL won't happen direct as the runway isn't long enough to fly a full load at MTOW back to DOH. More
Likely would be a DOH-SIN-OOL.

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 39): Maybe Alan Joyce is taking a leaf from his book and floating an idea

I said it at the bottom of the last thread, but think its worth repeating - I would love to know what he acutally said (more than the quote given in the initially linked article). I think that context would be important.

Quoting thai77w (Reply 43): DOH-OOL won't happen direct as the runway isn't long enough to fly a full load at MTOW back to DOH. More Likely would be a DOH-SIN-OOL.

Probably unlikely as KUL/SIN is taken up by D7 and TZ. I'd say CGK-OOL (they basically have that market to themselves) if QR consider extending one of their tags to SE Queensland. (BNE/OOL).

DPS is already too oversaturated with flights up the road at BNE, and DPS is a traditional low yield tourist market. Also, most Tourist Market to Tourist Market routes generally don't perform well from a yield perspective.

Quoting sq256 (Reply 45): Probably unlikely as KUL/SIN is taken up by D7 and TZ. I'd say CGK-OOL (they basically have that market to themselves) if QR consider extending one of their tags to SE Queensland. (BNE/OOL).

The market would be all ex JKT originating and there isn't much of it. Better options would be OOL-DPS/SIN/KUL/HKT-DOH. Yes there is competition on OOL-SIN/KUL, but who knows how much longer Air Asia X will last...

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 39): And just how soon will Qantas announce it's first 'top up' incremental order for extra Dreamliners?

IMHO at the delivery ceremony for the first B789, no earlier.
I hope they announce the delivery dates for at least the next 4 A380 first.

Gemuser

[Edited 2015-10-13 19:35:42]

It would be several years before a flight operated via CGK or DPS onwards to any Port. The market is not mature enough.

As you point out KUL and SIN have several flights a day (both BNE and OOL) but there is Demand for it after EY left.

Another point is while there's no jet bridges at OOL you won't see a gulf carrier.

Quoting gemuser (Reply 47): I hope they announce the delivery dates for at least the next 4 A380 first.

AJ was quite specific in stating QANTAS have a CAPEX budget of $1.5 billion for new aircraft over the next couple of years. At a guess, four new A380's would take $1 billion out of that budget.

I have a sneaking suspicion QANTAS will start focusing on different types of aircraft. They have EK to move the masses, so A380's may no longer be a priority for their fleet.